4 ms·

The killer application case is slow adoption inside ancient C and C++ codebases. That's the angle.

• pjmlp 1y ago
  It hardly brings anything new to the table in such cases, given its approach to safety. Most of it you can already get in C and C++, by using the tools that have in the market for the last 30 years.
  • lewdwig 1y ago
    And yet C/C++ developers have mostly spent the last 30 years not using those tools which is why safer successors to C and C++ appeared.
    • detaro 1y ago
      I think pjmlps point is that Zig is not adding enough to be one of those safer successors.
    • pjmlp 1y ago
      Zig is as safe as Modula-2 or Object Pascal, not the turning point of something like Swift or Rust.
  • lionkor 1y ago
    It brings a lot of nice features, the potential for a healthier ecosystem, a unified build system, explicit allocators, explicit casts, and so on.
    • pjmlp 1y ago
      Ecosystems sell languages, not the other way around.
      • lionkor 1y ago
        Yes, and you can use Zig in the C and C++ ecosystems, that's my point
        • pjmlp 1y ago
          For what though, what is the selling point to have IT accept it on the allowed toolchains.
          • deleted 1y ago
            [deleted]